Dirvine intervention

I forgot to say that this is a missing puzzle piece of what I was thinking about here.

Hopefully I can explain better now, because I’m extremely bad @ that.

If SAFE would serve as an internal exchange and asset to create an altDBC, you would have this.

In the example above to create 1 Tether you would need 1 nano to create the token. @ todays price you would need 6.6 MAID to give it, it’s price of $1.

With the 1 bitcoin example you would need 100M nano to create the token. @ todays price you would need 185428.5 MAID to give it, it’s price of 1BTC.

If SAFE has an exchange function built into it, at the creation of every altDBC they would have a nano value + market price.

With the 83B+ Tether example you would need 83 MAID to create the token. @ todays price you would need 549239667015 MAID (this means the price of MAID must go up, because there are not as many available) to give it, it’s price of 83B+ Tether.

I think numbers are just numbers, just because there is a decimal there doesn’t mean that 1 bitcoin can’t be represented as 100M Tether. This would almost be like going back to the gold standard and saying that you need a little gold nugget to create a currency. When you think about all the assets in the world, it maybe makes sense to add a little SAFE standard.

If SAFE the coin is both an exchange and asset to create altDBCs.
-You’ve eliminated debates about an exchange
-You’ve provided instant liquidity at token creation
-You have an underlying value incase a token fails
-The community directly experience a balance change when a token gets created. (if $1B comes online, they’ll need $1B in MAID to balance that)

3 Likes